Grazing or confining — Decoding Beef's environmental footprint

IF 11.2 1区 社会学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Environmental Impact Assessment Review Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-03 DOI:10.1016/j.eiar.2025.107846
Tiago G. Morais , Manuel P. dos Santos , Lúcia Barão , Tiago Domingos , Ricardo F.M. Teixeira
{"title":"Grazing or confining — Decoding Beef's environmental footprint","authors":"Tiago G. Morais ,&nbsp;Manuel P. dos Santos ,&nbsp;Lúcia Barão ,&nbsp;Tiago Domingos ,&nbsp;Ricardo F.M. Teixeira","doi":"10.1016/j.eiar.2025.107846","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of beef production are extremely variable depending on the livestock production system (LPS) used, with lack of clarity on the influencing factors. Here, we assess those factors using a mass balance model with regional case study data for Portugal. We show that the whole-system GHG emissions range for beef production from steers in beef herds is 15–124 kg CO<sub>2</sub>e per 100 g protein depending on LPS (confined, pasture-based or mixed), breed, age at slaughter, and adequacy and upstream impact of supplemental feed. If steers are adequately supplemented, then LPS that involve at least a stage of grazing for steers have the lowest emissions, regardless of supplemental feed impact. In case of suboptimal supplementation during grazing, confinement is optimal at intermediate to low feed impact. For high feed impact, slaughtering at weaning is optimal. Choosing the best LPS and slaughtering age reduces the range of emissions to 15–35 kg CO<sub>2</sub>e per 100 g protein.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":309,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Impact Assessment Review","volume":"112 ","pages":"Article 107846"},"PeriodicalIF":11.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Impact Assessment Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195925525000435","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of beef production are extremely variable depending on the livestock production system (LPS) used, with lack of clarity on the influencing factors. Here, we assess those factors using a mass balance model with regional case study data for Portugal. We show that the whole-system GHG emissions range for beef production from steers in beef herds is 15–124 kg CO2e per 100 g protein depending on LPS (confined, pasture-based or mixed), breed, age at slaughter, and adequacy and upstream impact of supplemental feed. If steers are adequately supplemented, then LPS that involve at least a stage of grazing for steers have the lowest emissions, regardless of supplemental feed impact. In case of suboptimal supplementation during grazing, confinement is optimal at intermediate to low feed impact. For high feed impact, slaughtering at weaning is optimal. Choosing the best LPS and slaughtering age reduces the range of emissions to 15–35 kg CO2e per 100 g protein.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
放牧还是圈养——解读牛肉的环境足迹
牛肉生产的温室气体(GHG)排放量因所使用的牲畜生产系统(LPS)而异,其影响因素缺乏明确性。在这里,我们使用质量平衡模型和葡萄牙的区域案例研究数据来评估这些因素。研究表明,肉牛群中肉牛生产的全系统温室气体排放范围为每100克蛋白质15-124千克二氧化碳当量,具体取决于LPS(密闭、牧场或混合)、品种、屠宰年龄以及补充饲料的充足性和上游影响。如果牛得到充分的补充,那么不管补充饲料对牛的影响如何,至少需要放牧一个阶段的LPS排放最低。在放牧期间的次优补充情况下,禁闭在中低饲料影响下是最佳的。对于高饲料影响,在断奶时屠宰是最佳的。选择最佳脂多糖和屠宰年龄可将排放范围降低至每100克蛋白质15-35公斤二氧化碳当量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
12.60
自引率
10.10%
发文量
200
审稿时长
33 days
期刊介绍: Environmental Impact Assessment Review is an interdisciplinary journal that serves a global audience of practitioners, policymakers, and academics involved in assessing the environmental impact of policies, projects, processes, and products. The journal focuses on innovative theory and practice in environmental impact assessment (EIA). Papers are expected to present innovative ideas, be topical, and coherent. The journal emphasizes concepts, methods, techniques, approaches, and systems related to EIA theory and practice.
期刊最新文献
Modeling the environmental benefits of recycling infrastructure demolition waste into recycled aggregate concrete bricks Integrating citizen science and machine learning to guide urban biodiversity planning: A case study of Belgium's top 10 urban regions Low-carbon innovation prediction: Identifying the key driving factors of different categories of low-carbon technological innovation in China Knowing when to stop: Threshold effects of human disturbance on ecosystem health in the Taihu Basin, China Comprehensive evaluation of regional sustainable development along the belt and road from production and consumption perspectives
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1